Community Input Meeting

Traffic Engineering • The width of Drake St. should allow for a turn lane and a possible central median. • The five-point intersection at Drake St./Randall Ave./zoo entrance does not allow for efficient traffic

movement.

• Drake St. is not at design capacity, which could allow for restriping to add bike lanes. • The impact of traffic on Grant St. is of more concern than Drake St. City of Madison Traffic

Engineering can analyze earlier tube counts vs. known neighborhood streets data and estimate impacts if Vilas Park Dr. were to be closed. General Comments

• There was consensus on the importance of a connecting system of paths within the park and from the park to Vilas Zoo. • Creation of a pedestrian connection around the north shore of Lake Wingra was discussed. The master plan document will discuss possible easements to create the connection. • Opportunities and challenges were discussed in regards to making connections through the Kubly &

Friday Trust parcels on the west side of Lake Wingra.

COMMUNITY INPUT MEETING

On June 22, 2020 a virtual meeting was held via Zoom Webinar to publicly present the park concepts and provide time for discussion and questions in break-out rooms. While an exact count of attendees is not available, although registration to the meeting was requested by 204 unique users, some of whom had more than one participant on screen. The meeting began with a short presentation, which provided a description of the concepts broken down by the key design elements: • Traffic on Vilas Park Drive

• Location of the main park shelter • Parking layout • Open space and recreation opportunities • Playground location • Lagoon (and ice skating) management

Following the presentation, two breakout sessions were held. In the first, participants were able to choose one of four rooms for a discussion on the following topics: • Room A – Traffic, Access and Parking • Room B – Lagoons, Natural Areas and Main Park Shelter

• Room C – Playgrounds, Recreation Areas and Open Space • Main Room – General Q&A

The second break out session was an open discussion.

Two of the four polls administered during the meeting provided some insight into the demographics and level of previous engagement by participants. Participants were asked the following questions:

1. Have you already reviewed concepts online? (52 responses) a. Yes (75%) b. No (25%) 2. How far do you live from the Park? (145 responses) a. Less than 3 blocks (50%) b. 3-8 blocks (26%) c. More than 8 blocks, but I can still walk or ride a bike to the park (14%) d. I don’t live near the park and I need a car or transit to get there (10%)

These responses show a majority (76%) of the participants were from the surrounding neighborhoods and about the same percentage (75%) had been informed about the process and taken the online concept survey prior to attending the meeting.

Below are general notes from each breakout room.

Room A – Traffic, Access, and Parking • Several residents living on Randall Ave. do not like any alternative that has the parking lot access out to Randall Ave. Residents feel the road is already too narrow and would prefer not to lose any trees that line the west side of the road.

• Some felt that parking does not need to be expanded in the northeast corner of the park as it services mainly the zoo and is too far from other park amenities. • Residents preferred alternatives with Vilas Park Dr. closed to through traffic. • Trees are one of the park’s best features and maintaining them should be a priority. • Due to noise concerns, the park shelter should be located as far away from residential properties as possible.

• Residents who live on Drake St. have concerns about increases in traffic due to moving the entrance towards Campbell St. This included concerns about increased traffic on the Campbell St. circle. • There was some concern that this plan was too similar to the one completed in the 1960s, which was rejected. • There was concern about bike and pedestrian safety if the parking lots were built too close to walkways. • A number of attendees felt that any multiuse path built near the southeast entrance should have a better connection to Arboretum Dr.

• Kate Kane with the City explained the process of working with local accessibility groups to help ensure the park can be used by people of all abilities.

Room B – Lagoons, Natural Areas and Main Park Shelter • Shelter could face out onto the Lake rather than the Lagoons, especially if the lagoons are not maintained as open water. • Desire to have skating on the lagoons (and skating in general). • Temporary closure of Vilas Park Drive (to vehicle traffic) due to COVID-19 has been received favorably. It has had a perceived improved on the function of the peninsula open space.

Room C – Playgrounds, Recreation Areas and Open Space • Tennis courts are well used and should be maintained in the final plan. Several courts are required for recreation programming. There are issues with maintenance and quality of the surface. • If pickleball and tennis are both included it should be on separate courts. It was stated by an attendee there are only 6 pickleball courts in the city. • Ice skating and hockey is important to the park. Preference would be to maintain skating on the lagoons if possible. A skating loop around the island would be great. • Neighborhood residents desire a playground in the mounds area/’Wingra’ overlook, this serves as a neighborhood playground, specifically for the Greenbush neighborhood. • A playground near the existing shoe playground should be maintained in the final plan. Users include local residents as well as Zoo visitors.

• “Two medium playgrounds in the main part are a real asset - access from different directions and spread out the intensity of use.” • There was question about why the park shelter was determined to be at the end of its serviceable life. • Adding bike racks and a b-cycle rack would be a good way to encourage more bike traffic.

• Final concept should help enforce sense of place and character of the park. Main Room – General Q&A • Several neighbors noted tennis courts are well used. Only place in the world where you can play tennis and listen to the lions roar at the same time.

• Plans should include a kayak and canoe launch on Lake Wingra and lagoon. • Some concern the concepts doesn’t address park use by families and children/youth. • “ Neighbors and friends have told me we have to retain the road for access for the disabled. I have noticed, however, a great increase in park use by those with mobility challenges since the road has been closed. In the 12 years I’ve lived nearby I have never seen wheelchairs and walkers in the park.”

Key takeaways from the meeting: • Parking needs to be developed that ensures the lowest impact to existing open space and vegetation. Maintaining the same number of stalls as currently exists is preferred. • A playground needs to remain near the existing shoe playground. More than one playground within the park is desired. • Closure of Vilas Park Drive and replacing the road with a multi-use path is preferred. • The new shelter should remain in a location near the current shelter (south of the island). • Keeping the lagoons open to allow for ice skating is desired. • Path and trail systems should include improvements for drainage and accessibility.

Following the meeting, the Greenbush, Vilas, and Dudgeon-Monore Neighborhood Associations issued the following joint statement:

The Greenbush, Vilas and Dudgeon Monroe Neighborhoods value Vilas Park as a community asset for all Madison residents. We want the Vilas Park Master Plan to ensure a strong future for Vilas Park. Toward that end, we are making two requests: (1) transparency in how you will decide which elements to include in the final design; and (2) a focus on pedestrian and bicyclist safety both in the final master plan and in near-term funding decisions for Vilas Park.

Transparency It is clear that difficult decisions need to be made for Vilas Park. The future of the lagoon and the balance between providing parking and preserving park green space are just two examples of such decisions. We believe that the Vilas Park Master Plan process will be strengthened by providing a clear explanation